>>8388537>Western drawn/styled ("toon") pictures and fan drawn ("fanart") images are not allowed.Now, I fully realize that /d/'s board culture has seemed to embrace fanart and willfully ignore this rule, with very little to zero complaints about fanart being posted, but /d/'s board culture has ALWAYS discouraged Western art.

>>8391023the younger the feet, the better...>>8391117yes! smelly JC feet after gym class are the BEST!>>8390363JK feet are a fine substitute if you cannot aquire JC feet! They smell almost as bad, as is the taste!

>>8393686Anyone else really into the idea of licking a girls feet while she's being (gang)fucked by someone else? She'd be stuck getting fucked hard and wouldn't be able to stop you from taking her shoes and socks off and start licking her soles.

>>8396165You're not a pedo for liking drawings of any type. If you're not hurting any living thing, don't let retards tell you what to like. The definition of pedophile is not "sexually attracted to drawings".

>>8396176if you masturbated to yaoi drawings, does that make you gay? Obviously. The definition of pedophilia is not "would you molest a child if given the opportunity, with no repercussions?" The definition is, "do you masturbate while thinking of prepubescent children?". Period. And, by the way, as to the former question, I probably would. As 99% of Lolicon fans would, BTW. But cheers have some Adult-looking-feet!

>>8396184>The definition is, "do you masturbate while thinking of prepubescent children?"It LITERALLY isn't. Pic related is the actual definition.I am NOT attracted to children. I'm generally repulsed by them to be honest. But I'm madly attracted to lolis. I have no reason to lie to some weirdo in a feet thread on 4chan. If you WOULD molest a real child, then yes, you're a pedophile.

It's no fun being a pedophile, belive me. G*D do I want to have sex with a child, to snuggle that little prepubescent cunny; I struggle with this AFFLICTION every single day. But boy, do I LOVE adult womens feet!~ They are AMAZING!

>>8396184The people who likes loli only exclusively like lolis and they find liking real kids to be fucked up. It's really stupid to associate them under the same name as people who actually has a fetish for real child. There's a huge difference between them which is why there should be different term used such as the word, lolicon. This is very edifferent when you compare it to people fapping to yaoi drawings. They will still get turned on by real life gay porn and be able to fap to it without a doubt. It's not the same for lolicons at all.

>>8396208this anime in general led to a plethora of feet art, although I don't entirely understand why. probably an untapped desire for JK [highschool girl, first year, 15-16 yo] feet would be my guess? I mean who wouldn't love JK [first year] feet? other than faggots of course.

>>8397561Are you ESL? Definitely try reading what I said again. In case you still don't get it, I was complaining that he does NOT draw more degenerate stuff, not that he DOES draw it. Meaning... I want him to draw more degenerate stuff, like sweaty feet and footjobs.

>>8398977>>8398993Actually, stinknigger here doesn't know how right he actually is. Lots of European armies (including the Russians and Germans) used to wear footwraps instead of socks in their ill-fitting boots. The Russians only switched to socks a few years ago, and they jokingly referred to their footwraps as "chemical weapons."

>>8398958No, obviously you're the one who lacks comprehension my under educated amigo. Your reply to me wishing he'd draw degeneracy was to ask what he drew that was degenerate. Clearly showing a complete lack of understanding of my comment. Either you're ESL and you thought my usage of the word 'more' meant 'do it with greater frequently' or you're severely lacking knowledge in English grammar. In either case, his past works have ZERO relevancy to the conversation or my statement. So you to put it simply you're a big stinky doo doo head and I'm better at posting feet than you are.

>>8400162> 'more' meant 'do it with greater frequently'>So you to put it simplyIt's 'frequency', not 'frequently'; for the latter, the 'you' is incorrect and should have been omitted.ESL -- now I'm 100% certain you're projecting.I'll help you out some more though: the correct grammar usage, for the meaning you were originally attempting to convey, would have been "yom will never draw [the] more degenerate aspects of footfaggotry". Notice the 'the'; it completely changes the meaning of your sentence, toward that which you originally intended.Honestly, I don't know whether you really are ESL, or perhaps just suffer from brain damage, but either way you're obviously incredibly insecure about it and I have no desire to engage with your autism any longer.

>>8400635>a couple of typos and an editing mistake from erasing what I'd typed to type something else>ignoring every point I've made and trying desperately to type as properly as possible while reusing my insultsSasuga, autism-san.

>>8402288>refuses to acknowledge their embarrassing grammatical blunders all throughout the convo>accuses someone of 'reusing their insults', then does the exact same thing in the same post [autism]Projection at its finest. You know, it isn't really _that hard_ to type out a couple of sentences without making typos and grammatical errors all over the place. For most of us anyway.